Guild bid on up to 10 different Guild Trader locations each week with update 23

Grimm13 · July 2019

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Again I say it - ZOS please work with us, give us a forum thread, give us a named dev, and consult with us rather than this nightmare you are handing us.

Yes, agree, definitely... how many ways do they want us to say it. This is what has been asked for years.

GarnetFire17 · July 2019

EllieBlue wrote: »

I have this nagging suspicion that zos knows exactly what they are doing and what they really intend to do is create chaos. Shake things up a bit. A bit like Volendrung in PvP. Trading has been the same more and less since trade guilds were introduced in the game. So if it's chaos they are aiming for, then it will be chaos that they will get. When a game is no longer fun, creates more grief than happiness, causes anxiety instead of relaxation, rage instead of joy, then perhaps it is time to rethink what we are still doing here.(especially if paying eso+).

The only result of chaos is the established guilds that can afford to deal with chaos will fine while all the other guilds in the bottom half are up the creek without a paddle. It's not going to change the pecking order or anything it just means most guilds will be shifted around a bit more each week. What is the benefit of that? people in the guilds won't like it, they joined because they wanted to be in a certain spot. So who exactly is this change for? Is not for the upstart guilds trying to break through, the rich guilds aren't going lower their bid, they'll raise them because they are on higher alert and they still want their primary spot. This doesn't really help anyone. It just creates more work for the rich guilds that have more overhead to make bids but don't really need them bc they are already dominating. And makes it very expensive for guilds struggling to afford one bid each week and increases the chances they are going to lose bids as well.

EllieBlue · July 2019

Grimm has made another post for the devs to hopefully see in the pts section. Link is

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/483891/guild-multi-bidding-why#latest

so if any trading guilds GM (or others) with the same concern, might want to pop in there as well.

deleted008293 · July 2019

My two cents... I think this is a bad movement from ZOS and we need an official statement about why we have this change. Why it is needed, why it is good and why it is bad. We need to analyze this all the ways in and out, up and down and not rush implementing something that might only benefit the so called "mafia" or "elitism" even further. Lets not forget that some changes might be even suggested by some of the player base who are way too greedy for power and control over the game.
First raids and now trading. I am here to make things RIGHT for everyone, not just for a bunch of individuals. So please be critic, be constructive but don't hate, attack or sabotage me for telling this straight.

As the game grows, more and more people start forming more and more guilds, overcrowding an already crowded system. So what happens?
1. There will be more and more guilds without a good trading spot or even a trade spot at all.
2. The good spots will be more and more demanding.
3. Prices for bedding on such spots will also increase more and more.
4. Prices for items will also be lower and lower as more people will join the scene.
5. Players with a large amount of trading goods and/or a large value of trade goods will now consider joining only the best guilds leaving the entry level and medium level guilds with less and less good or any traders, slowly killing them.
6. Guilds alliances will happen more and more, again killing the medium and entry level guilds.
7. Exploits, conflicts, fights, sabotages, harassment, extortions, kicks, bans, thievery, client stealing, drama will affect more and more players. As raiding, housing, and social communities doesn't have that enough already.
8. The gap between elitism and entry level will be even larger than before.
9. Overall game economy might suffer.
10. Bad gameplay mechanics and balances might push away a lot of customers from this game, current or prospective.

This seems to benefit only the best trade guilds while killing the medium and smaller guilds and totally nuking the new guilds. It also benefit only the best traders and work totally against the ones who doesn't trade as much.
Am I wrong?

The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start.
Another change I would like to see is to give traders money back for making purchases from NOT so optimal trading spots such as traders outside cities. Taxes from sales and money back should also be adjusted in a way to advantage both the guild, by collecting more taxes and the players by collecting a small bonus per sale.
Just like thieves or dark brotherhood guilds we might need a trading guild skill line designed to work in advantage of new players. See above.

End note: Lets make sure there are no way of exploiting this system!

Arrodisia · July 2019

Sorcery wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

From PC EU I know multiple gm of established guilds, including myself, thinking and talking bout using the ejection seat with u23. Too much bs since months. Grief and feeling unhappy, disrespected and feeling like having to do things u don't want to do including even logging in isn't the feeling a game should give u.

Yeah on PC NA i've spoken with a few GMs ready to do the same. This update will just mean all guilds will have to start funding more, being more strict or raising requirements to remain competitive not only within your zone but against zones ahead and below you as well. Going to be a mess.

I can see both of your points. This seems like a heap of unnecessary chaos, piled on top of an exploit in the system. This won't help small, mid sized, and newer guilds at all. It'll be unfortunate to lose part of the player base over something, which could've been handled better.

I want to thank everyone again for coming into the thread, and posting your opinions and suggestions. Maybe it will help. Cheers all.

JarlUlfric · July 2019

As someone who runs a large trading guild, this seems to be a massive headache that is going to require so much more from our members to maintain our spots.

3 total bids? Sure that's cool.

10?! That's ridiculous.

What they should also do is take a % of the bids that you place that weren't the bid that wins.

So if let's say you bid 10M in Place 1, 8M in Place 2, and 5M in Place 3.

You win Place 1, the game should take a small % of the bids from Places 2 & 3. There should be some sort of price for being able to bid in more than one place. Make it 5 - 10% of the bid. So in this case, you'd pay anywhere from 650k to 1.3M for being able to bid in more than one place with how much the bid was in this hypothetical scenario.

That would be enough for the larger guilds to be more strategic and think about bids rather that dropping mountains of gold on places that have no business being bid on that much.

Arrodisia · July 2019

nordmarian wrote: »

My two cents... I think this is a bad movement from ZOS and we need an official statement about why we have this change. Why it is needed, why it is good and why it is bad. We need to analyze this all the ways in and out, up and down and not rush implementing something that might only benefit the so called "mafia" or "elitism" even further. Lets not forget that some changes might be even suggested by some of the player base who are way too greedy for power and control over the game.
First raids and now trading. I am here to make things RIGHT for everyone, not just for a bunch of individuals. So please be critic, be constructive but don't hate, attack or sabotage me for telling this straight.

As the game grows, more and more people start forming more and more guilds, overcrowding an already crowded system. So what happens?
1. There will be more and more guilds without a good trading spot or even a trade spot at all.
2. The good spots will be more and more demanding.
3. Prices for bedding on such spots will also increase more and more.
4. Prices for items will also be lower and lower as more people will join the scene.
5. Players with a large amount of trading goods and/or a large value of trade goods will now consider joining only the best guilds leaving the entry level and medium level guilds with less and less good or any traders, slowly killing them.
6. Guilds alliances will happen more and more, again killing the medium and entry level guilds.
7. Exploits, conflicts, fights, sabotages, harassment, extortions, kicks, bans, thievery, client stealing, drama will affect more and more players. As raiding, housing, and social communities doesn't have that enough already.
8. The gap between elitism and entry level will be even larger than before.
9. Overall game economy might suffer.
10. Bad gameplay mechanics and balances might push away a lot of customers from this game, current or prospective.

This seems to benefit only the best trade guilds while killing the medium and smaller guilds and totally nuking the new guilds. It also benefit only the best traders and work totally against the ones who doesn't trade as much.
Am I wrong?

The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start.
Another change I would like to see is to give traders money back for making purchases from NOT so optimal trading spots such as traders outside cities. Taxes from sales and money back should also be adjusted in a way to advantage both the guild, by collecting more taxes and the players by collecting a small bonus per sale.
Just like thieves or dark brotherhood guilds we might need a trading guild skill line designed to work in advantage of new players. See above.

End note: Lets make sure there are no way of exploiting this system!

I agree with many of the 1-10 points, but not sure about the suggestions part yet. Can you please elaborate on this part?
The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start. Did you mean 2-3 guilds will share a vendor, since we lack vendors?

Cheers mate.

Thorvik_Tyrson · July 2019

juttaa77b16_ESO wrote: »

nordmarian wrote: »

My two cents... I think this is a bad movement from ZOS and we need an official statement about why we have this change. Why it is needed, why it is good and why it is bad. We need to analyze this all the ways in and out, up and down and not rush implementing something that might only benefit the so called "mafia" or "elitism" even further. Lets not forget that some changes might be even suggested by some of the player base who are way too greedy for power and control over the game.
First raids and now trading. I am here to make things RIGHT for everyone, not just for a bunch of individuals. So please be critic, be constructive but don't hate, attack or sabotage me for telling this straight.

As the game grows, more and more people start forming more and more guilds, overcrowding an already crowded system. So what happens?
1. There will be more and more guilds without a good trading spot or even a trade spot at all.
2. The good spots will be more and more demanding.
3. Prices for bedding on such spots will also increase more and more.
4. Prices for items will also be lower and lower as more people will join the scene.
5. Players with a large amount of trading goods and/or a large value of trade goods will now consider joining only the best guilds leaving the entry level and medium level guilds with less and less good or any traders, slowly killing them.
6. Guilds alliances will happen more and more, again killing the medium and entry level guilds.
7. Exploits, conflicts, fights, sabotages, harassment, extortions, kicks, bans, thievery, client stealing, drama will affect more and more players. As raiding, housing, and social communities doesn't have that enough already.
8. The gap between elitism and entry level will be even larger than before.
9. Overall game economy might suffer.
10. Bad gameplay mechanics and balances might push away a lot of customers from this game, current or prospective.

This seems to benefit only the best trade guilds while killing the medium and smaller guilds and totally nuking the new guilds. It also benefit only the best traders and work totally against the ones who doesn't trade as much.
Am I wrong?

The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start.
Another change I would like to see is to give traders money back for making purchases from NOT so optimal trading spots such as traders outside cities. Taxes from sales and money back should also be adjusted in a way to advantage both the guild, by collecting more taxes and the players by collecting a small bonus per sale.
Just like thieves or dark brotherhood guilds we might need a trading guild skill line designed to work in advantage of new players. See above.

End note: Lets make sure there are no way of exploiting this system!

I agree with many of the 1-10 points, but not sure about the suggestions part yet. Can you please elaborate on this part?
The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start. Did you mean 2-3 guilds will share a vendor, since we lack vendors?

Cheers mate.

I believe that is exactly what he is saying, increase the number of guilds that a trader NPC supports. Either that or add more traders in all of the spots. The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader. I proposed this same idea in another thread last month.

It really boggles my mind that ZOS pits players against players in this trading war, And the players put up with it for the most part. ZOS also does not appear to see the negative reactions to this that players have. I have seen several posts in the last 3 months that I have been playing ESO that comment on peoples friends leaving the game due to the (lack of an easy) trade system.

If ZOS is really trying to emulate historical trading, then why aren't their a dozen or more traders at the ports (I see no traders at the ports) and in the major cities? or other crossroads in the game maps? Traders go where the business is, and buyers go where there are lots of traders.

Jayman1000 · July 2019

Guys you are being so negative sheesh

. There is lots of room in plenty of good trading guilds, just check the guild finder. Lots of free slots actually. Dont sweat it, this change will make life easier for everyone I have a feeling about this,

Urigall · July 2019

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

Gandrhulf_Harbard · July 2019

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

martinhpb16_ESO · July 2019

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

martinhpb16_ESO · July 2019

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

Ghost guilds are there for backup. The guild is disbanded and a guild that failed to get a trader takes over.

This practise will continue and may even be more prevalent with the new multi bid system.

What we need is more trading spots not the ability to bid on more spots.

Dont_do_drugs · July 2019

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

Ghost guilds are there for backup. The guild is disbanded and a guild that failed to get a trader takes over.

This practise will continue and may even be more prevalent with the new multi bid system.

What we need is more trading spots not the ability to bid on more spots.

Nope Martin, this may be true for PC EU, but consoles have other problems with ghost guilds. It's not the same.

martinhpb16_ESO · July 2019

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

Ghost guilds are there for backup. The guild is disbanded and a guild that failed to get a trader takes over.

This practise will continue and may even be more prevalent with the new multi bid system.

What we need is more trading spots not the ability to bid on more spots.

Nope Martin, this may be true for PC EU, but consoles have other problems with ghost guilds. It's not the same.

Oh! Thats not good, thankfully we dont have that yet.

Gandrhulf_Harbard · July 2019

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

Ghost guilds are there for backup. The guild is disbanded and a guild that failed to get a trader takes over.

This practise will continue and may even be more prevalent with the new multi bid system.

What we need is more trading spots not the ability to bid on more spots.

I'm going t put out there that I firmly believe that anyone who things Ghost Guilds are JUST for getting a back-up slot has no understanding at all how competitive commerce works.

Having a place to sell your stuff is great.
Making sure your opponent no longer exists (takeovers - in this game taking over their pitch to deny them use of it) is MUCH BETTER.

If there's only one Trader in town that's who people go to, and that person can then charge more than they could if there were competition.

These are basic principles of market economies.

All The Best

Dont_do_drugs · July 2019

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

Ghost guilds are there for backup. The guild is disbanded and a guild that failed to get a trader takes over.

This practise will continue and may even be more prevalent with the new multi bid system.

What we need is more trading spots not the ability to bid on more spots.

Nope Martin, this may be true for PC EU, but consoles have other problems with ghost guilds. It's not the same.

Oh! Thats not good, thankfully we dont have that yet.

That's what I said about backup traders 2 years ago when they appeared on consoles as well. U can find that comment from me somewhere in an old complaint thread about it.

@Gandrhulf_Harbard
This doesn't work on pc that well. Having empty guilds left and right of u with working trading addons makes ur guild lose sales. Guilds benefit on pc also due to addons. having strong neighbors, that's why even some gm do not like each other, they look that their neighbor is doing good in sales as well. Strong neighbors means strong and attractive hub and more will come to that hub. Noone would go to belkarth on pc EU for one or two good guilds, while mourn has 5 or 6 of them. As example.

ezio45 · July 2019

Dark_Lord_Kuro wrote: »

Well now ghost guild that existed as back up if you lose your bid wont have a reason to exist at all since the real guil now do the joob of 9 ghost guild+real guild and only end up keeping one so in the end potentionally 1 more available trader per ghost guild wich is avaiable to smaller guild

this is very flawed.

shell guilds exist mostly for profit and an occasional backup. they also can use this to meaning there is a greater chance of the shell guilds getting a spot to sell. This is really just fuel on the fire for the whole trader situation.

ezio45 · July 2019

@ZOS_RobGarrett

Bottom line. With this system you are taking a tanker truck of gasoline and pouring it on the fire that everyone complaining about the trader system has been telling you about.

All this is going to do is give shell guilds a guaranteed stall to sell, to make more money to put into the shell guilds and the top tier trading guilds using them to raise money for bid. You are rewarding people exploiting this at the expense of guilds trying to get stalls legitimately.

We want a trading system where you bid on a trader, if you win you are stuck with it for the week and if you lose you lose. All zos has to do is code it so if you win a trader that guild owns it for the week, regardless of circumstance.

Jayman1000 · July 2019

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

Urigall · July 2019

I did consider the possibility that someone at ZoS came into work one morning and said "Hey guys, let's make the guild bidding system REALLY unfair, that'll be good for a laugh" After thinking about this possibility, I decided it was one of the less likely explanations. Either ZoS's developer team are oblivious to the potential for a power grab, unfairness, pissed off players and so on, or there is something else going on here. ZoS's developer team are not stupid, so I lean towards "something else"

That "something else" might be stress testing the new bidding system, to see if certain practices need to be changed.

Yes, I know...at first sight, this does look like a gift to those players who use ghost guilds as an underhand tactic. Might not be wise to try it on a larger scale under the new system. ZoS will then get the hard data they need to stop certain practices. Those data - sort of - exist at present. Mass use of ghost guilds under the new system will put the need for intervention beyond doubt. Creating a lot more, new guilds every week will soon highlight what is going on.

Why not remove ghost guilds at the outset? ZoS probably regard us as responsible adults, who are willing to play fair with the new system: ZoS might not want to seem heavy handed. If some players can't be trusted to play fair with the new system, there is the justification for stepping in. Then ZoS will either have to ignore - a lot of - loud complaints or intervene.

Anyone who is thinking about flooding the new, bidding process with ghost guild bids might end up doing us all a favour. Give them enough rope and all that.

SantieClaws · July 2019

Jayman1000 wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

Only guilds that are already very large and have a huge amount of money in the bank will benefit.

You need to have that money in order to make the multiple bids.

Small and medium guilds do not have that kind of cash up front.

Those are the guilds that will not be able to make use of this system and will suffer as a result.

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

Jayman1000 · July 2019

ezio45 wrote: »

Dark_Lord_Kuro wrote: »

Well now ghost guild that existed as back up if you lose your bid wont have a reason to exist at all since the real guil now do the joob of 9 ghost guild+real guild and only end up keeping one so in the end potentionally 1 more available trader per ghost guild wich is avaiable to smaller guild

this is very flawed.

shell guilds exist mostly for profit and an occasional backup. they also can use this to meaning there is a greater chance of the shell guilds getting a spot to sell. This is really just fuel on the fire for the whole trader situation.

If you lost your trader to a shell guild you bid too low if that shell guild can resell the trader. Which they probably can if they won the bid; why would the bid so high that they can't resell? Think about that.

Dont_do_drugs · July 2019

Jayman1000 wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

u are aware that chances of getting a trader or getting no trader isnt changing in any ways, since the amount of traders is still the same and the same amount of guilds are getting outbid while the same amount of guilds are getting a trader? simple mathematics.

Jayman1000 · July 2019

SantieClaws wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

Only guilds that are already very large and have a huge amount of money in the bank will benefit.

You need to have that money in order to make the multiple bids.

Small and medium guilds do not have that kind of cash up front.

Those are the guilds that will not be able to make use of this system and will suffer as a result.

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

What you are describing here are less strong guilds trying to bid out of their league. If they aint got the cash they need to bid on less valuable traders.

martinhpb16_ESO · July 2019

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Gandrhulf_Harbard wrote: »

Urigall wrote: »

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader.

Scarcity of spots is made worse when a spot is taken and the guild inventory is left empty. I spent a while looking for some set items today and saw two, empty traders in two, reasonably popular locations.

Maybe they all forgot to fill their slots.

No, they were almost certainly bought by Ghost Guilds to price competition out of the market.

All The Best

Ghost guilds are there for backup. The guild is disbanded and a guild that failed to get a trader takes over.

This practise will continue and may even be more prevalent with the new multi bid system.

What we need is more trading spots not the ability to bid on more spots.

I'm going t put out there that I firmly believe that anyone who things Ghost Guilds are JUST for getting a back-up slot has no understanding at all how competitive commerce works.

Having a place to sell your stuff is great.
Making sure your opponent no longer exists (takeovers - in this game taking over their pitch to deny them use of it) is MUCH BETTER.

If there's only one Trader in town that's who people go to, and that person can then charge more than they could if there were competition.

These are basic principles of market economies.

All The Best

I've been a GM of an established trading guild for over four years

Ghost Guilds on PC EU are for backups or selling as backups.

Thanks

Jayman1000 · July 2019

Dont_do_drugs wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

u are aware that chances of getting a trader or getting no trader isnt changing in any ways, since the amount of traders is still the same and the same amount of guilds are getting outbid while the same amount of guilds are getting a trader? simple mathematics.

Again what you are describing here is simply less strong guilds losing bids because they are not strong enough. That's how competition works. The advantage is that guilds can now bid on multiple traders, so if they lose their main one, they will most likely get their backup, especially if the GM's just bid a little clever. This is a major advantage and lessens the risk of losing the trader a lot. I agree that if player population continues to rise and guilds become entirely full maybe zos would have to consider somehow adding more traders or similar. But currently there are plenty of free spots in so many many good trade guilds. Just check the guild finder and you'll see.

SantieClaws · July 2019

Jayman1000 wrote: »

SantieClaws wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

Only guilds that are already very large and have a huge amount of money in the bank will benefit.

You need to have that money in order to make the multiple bids.

Small and medium guilds do not have that kind of cash up front.

Those are the guilds that will not be able to make use of this system and will suffer as a result.

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

What you are describing here are less strong guilds trying to bid out of their league. If they aint got the cash they need to bid on less valuable traders.

Which will already have been bid on by many of the stronger guilds as back up traders. They are not going to chase the trader next door as a backup - they will chase cheaper ones - thus pushing the traders out of those spots. The very traders who won't have a backup bid because they cannot afford it.

There is no infinite money pot for most guilds to throw on multiple trader bids in the hope of getting 'something'.

What we need is a system that gives more guilds the chance to get a trader - not less.

The only thing that will fix this, the only thing that will allow for genuine competition on prices, is a huge increase in trading slots. There is no genuine competition on prices if large numbers of guilds are shut out of the market.

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

Arrodisia · July 2019

Thorvik_Tyrson wrote: »

juttaa77b16_ESO wrote: »

nordmarian wrote: »

My two cents... I think this is a bad movement from ZOS and we need an official statement about why we have this change. Why it is needed, why it is good and why it is bad. We need to analyze this all the ways in and out, up and down and not rush implementing something that might only benefit the so called "mafia" or "elitism" even further. Lets not forget that some changes might be even suggested by some of the player base who are way too greedy for power and control over the game.
First raids and now trading. I am here to make things RIGHT for everyone, not just for a bunch of individuals. So please be critic, be constructive but don't hate, attack or sabotage me for telling this straight.

As the game grows, more and more people start forming more and more guilds, overcrowding an already crowded system. So what happens?
1. There will be more and more guilds without a good trading spot or even a trade spot at all.
2. The good spots will be more and more demanding.
3. Prices for bedding on such spots will also increase more and more.
4. Prices for items will also be lower and lower as more people will join the scene.
5. Players with a large amount of trading goods and/or a large value of trade goods will now consider joining only the best guilds leaving the entry level and medium level guilds with less and less good or any traders, slowly killing them.
6. Guilds alliances will happen more and more, again killing the medium and entry level guilds.
7. Exploits, conflicts, fights, sabotages, harassment, extortions, kicks, bans, thievery, client stealing, drama will affect more and more players. As raiding, housing, and social communities doesn't have that enough already.
8. The gap between elitism and entry level will be even larger than before.
9. Overall game economy might suffer.
10. Bad gameplay mechanics and balances might push away a lot of customers from this game, current or prospective.

This seems to benefit only the best trade guilds while killing the medium and smaller guilds and totally nuking the new guilds. It also benefit only the best traders and work totally against the ones who doesn't trade as much.
Am I wrong?

The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start.
Another change I would like to see is to give traders money back for making purchases from NOT so optimal trading spots such as traders outside cities. Taxes from sales and money back should also be adjusted in a way to advantage both the guild, by collecting more taxes and the players by collecting a small bonus per sale.
Just like thieves or dark brotherhood guilds we might need a trading guild skill line designed to work in advantage of new players. See above.

End note: Lets make sure there are no way of exploiting this system!

I agree with many of the 1-10 points, but not sure about the suggestions part yet. Can you please elaborate on this part?
The way I would like this to change is to allow multiple players to bid on SAME trader and instead of one guild per trader to have lets say 2-3 for start. Did you mean 2-3 guilds will share a vendor, since we lack vendors?

Cheers mate.

I believe that is exactly what he is saying, increase the number of guilds that a trader NPC supports. Either that or add more traders in all of the spots. The fact stands that there are not enough traders to go around for the number of guilds that want to trade, or players that would trade if they were not excluded from participating as they cant regularly get a trader. I proposed this same idea in another thread last month.

It really boggles my mind that ZOS pits players against players in this trading war, And the players put up with it for the most part. ZOS also does not appear to see the negative reactions to this that players have. I have seen several posts in the last 3 months that I have been playing ESO that comment on peoples friends leaving the game due to the (lack of an easy) trade system.

If ZOS is really trying to emulate historical trading, then why aren't their a dozen or more traders at the ports (I see no traders at the ports) and in the major cities? or other crossroads in the game maps? Traders go where the business is, and buyers go where there are lots of traders.

If 2-3 guilds could be at one vendor, ZOS would need to change the interface a bit to accomodate it. It would depend on ZOS's willingness to do so.

I do agree with adding more vendors. Having a slight difference between trade guilds vs. available vendors creates competition. However, having a large difference between trading guilds vs. available vendors, like we have now, creates chaos. There is nothing fun about fake, ghost, and backup guilds taking the vendor spots of legitimate guilds. Imho, ZOS should add more traders to as many existing trade areas as possible, and they should do something about fake, backup and ghost guilds on both PC and console. So, they can no longer take spots from legitimate guilds. If they don't remove the exploit first, there will always be too many guilds without traders, no matter how many new kiosks get added. The longer the exploits go on, the more players will abuse it.

I'm still against the 10 x bids. With and without the exploits, it's bad for small, medium, and newer guilds. The larger guilds don't really want to take their spots, but they'll have to do it, when they get pushed out of their spots. Just a couple weeks back, one of my guilds lost an expensive spot to an almost completely empty vendor, who was selling only 1 stacks of worms and 2 stacks of insects. With every guild and fake guild bidding on multiple spots, the bid prices will inflate too high for many guilds to compete. The trading system should be fun for all, not just the already rich. Otherwise, why should they bother participating in it?

best wishes mate

Jayman1000 · July 2019

SantieClaws wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

SantieClaws wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

martinhpb16_ESO wrote: »

Jayman1000 wrote: »

I have a feeling about this,

Oh great, you have a feeling.

Meanwhile all of us GMs who have to manage the trade system are all in complete agreement that this will be a total sham.

My GM's in my trade guilds have the opposite opinion, this will work wonders for how safe you can be in the knowledge that you wont be without a trader. But yes, you have to actually use the opportunity that this new system presents to you. I have seen no compelling argument that in any way explains how this will be sham or the like.

Only guilds that are already very large and have a huge amount of money in the bank will benefit.

You need to have that money in order to make the multiple bids.

Small and medium guilds do not have that kind of cash up front.

Those are the guilds that will not be able to make use of this system and will suffer as a result.

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

What you are describing here are less strong guilds trying to bid out of their league. If they aint got the cash they need to bid on less valuable traders.

Which will already have been bid on by many of the stronger guilds as back up traders. They are not going to chase the trader next door as a backup - they will chase cheaper ones - thus pushing the traders out of those spots. The very traders who won't have a backup bid because they cannot afford it.

There is no infinite money pot for most guilds to throw on multiple trader bids in the hope of getting 'something'.

What we need is a system that gives more guilds the chance to get a trader - not less.

The only thing that will fix this, the only thing that will allow for genuine competition on prices, is a huge increase in trading slots. There is no genuine competition on prices if large numbers of guilds are shut out of the market.

Yours with paws
Santie Claws

Again, as I said before, less strong guilds should take care then to not bid out of their league. If they are getting outbid and they cannot afford to bid higher, they need to choose less valuable traders to bid on. If they are already bidding on the very least valuable traders, and are losing, and cant afford to bid more, then I would say such a trade guild was just not strong enough to win over the competition.